Paper negatives

[chrism]

Chamonix 10x8, Schneider Kreuznach 360mm/f6.8, Kenthene glossy, Ilford multigrade 1+15, Epson V850 scan:


Pippa 2015 #23 by chrism229, on Flickr


Pippa 2015 #24 by chrism229, on Flickr

Chris

[photonsoup]

Last spring I took some paper negatives of last years rushes collapsed against a fence. upon showing the contact prints and the negatives to the family I discovered that I liked looking at the paper negatives better than the prints. My middle daughter was the only one who agreed with me, everyone else liked the positive print better. (She's the artist in the family). Which do you prefer??

5x7 Arista #2 preflashed exposed at ISO 12

[Tin Can]

Nobody listens to middle child, however they are usually astute.

This negative is better to gaze into...

[Fr. Mark]

I prefer the negative, but maybe if you cut the print exposure 1/2 to 1 stop you'd like the resulting print better?

[NedL]

I too prefer the negative, and it's not uncommon for me to prefer a paper negative...

[Michael E]

I prefer the positive. Does that mean I'm not an artist?

[premortho]

Maybe.

I prefer the positive. Does that mean I'm not an artist?

[thienhuy72]

My first test shot
Nikkor 180/5.6
Ilford Multigrade IV Deluxe.
Exposed @ 6
Developed by Bromophen in 2 mins

[Dwayne Martin]

I know I am submitting a lot here... so bare with me...

One of the things I like about paper negatives is the fact, that there are so many things you can do after the negative development.
Manipulation on the back of the negative for example...

This is Trine - the back of the negative was altered - with what I honestly don't remember, but maybe a plain pencil...

red libstick is also a possibillity, but then you'll get very white areas..

But it is FUN to try!!

This photograph is absolutely amazing........

[Emil Schildt]

This photograph is absolutely amazing........

Thanks - but with a girl like this, it is very easy to do...